October 31, 2011

A Google search returns 35,400 results the day after Politico drops its story about 2 female employees who, years ago, were angered and upset by what they said was "sexually suggestive behavior" by Herman Cain.

Let's listen to the original use of the phrase "high-tech lynching." It was just about exactly 20 years ago that Clarence Thomas, nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court by George H. W. Bush, faced the Senate Judiciary Committee, which, under the watch of Senator Joe Biden, heard testimony accusing him of sexual harassment.

were angered and upset by what they said was "sexually suggestive behavior" by Herman Cain.

What does that even mean?

Even if you took Anita Hill entirely at her word (which would be stupid), everything but the alleged pubic hair on the coke can was completely in the realm of joking banter. Maybe a little stupid and tasteless, but nothing that harms anyone. If women are too sensitive to deal with occassional dirty jokes, I wouldn't want to work with them, either.

Besides Althouse, my other blog-obsession is a "fashion and lifestyle blog for high achieving chicks;" it's mainly geared towards youngish women in professional occupations (lots of lawyers, some bankers and scientists and docs). The commentatiate is a lot like Althouse's- lots of regulars and personalities known, interesting discussions- but it's basically all college-educated women.

Last week there was a lot of discussion about working with "pigs" - the two most concrete examples were one woman who went to lunch with a group of male co-workers who devolved into stupid jokes about putting webcams in the ladies room; the second involved a meeting discussing a calendar for the company, where the constant joke about doing nude calendars came up.

These were presented as disgusting and unacceptable. Many commenters said that they would have walked out, or even looked for a new job. I found that level of sensitivity, among women who are supposed to be tough, strong, and capable, extremely disappointing.

Lyssa nails it. The high-tech lynching in Thomas's case wasn't what Hill actually said. It was the way the Democrats played out her allegations to dramatic effect. First the whispering campaign, then the sympathetic witness coaxed to reveal the deep, dark, painful banalities that bedeviled her.

Interesting to remember that this was the first time Juan Williams failed to follow his script.

At the time, I thought Anita Hill's allegations were about banter between junior law faculty colleagues - not banter I would approve of, but still just banter and understandable under the circumstances as Anita Hill described them, I guess.

Then I read Justice Thomas book wherein he lays out a timetable of when they were in the same place at the same time and possibly could have interacted. I presume the timetable is accurate, since it would be easily verifiable by intrepid reporters, and I never seen any hint of it being refuted.

There is just no way that Anita Hill's story can be anything but moonshine and horsefeathers.

Sorepaw said: (a) No one besides Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas knows whether a single one of her allegations was true

(b) Most of those who held up Anita Hill as a role model are conspicuously uninterested in the actual truth of any of her charges

I took a class on the Supreme Court in law school, and my professor dropped the paper topic suggestion of looking back at the Thomas nomination and what people say about it in retrospect- whether her allegations gained more or less credibility over time. I thought that this would be interesting and did some preliminary research. As far as I could tell, there wasn't a single piece of scholarly writing discussing the nomination from the angle of the truth of her allegations.

That told me all that I needed to know about that (and I abandoned that topic- no way I was going to break new ground on that can of worms).

In a time of the culture wars such that even a picture of one's wife in a bikini on one's desk at the office is regarded as creating a "hostile (i.e., sexist) work environment"by not only ardent feministas with an ax to grind but by agreeing courts, NO ONE is safe from the most flimsy of charges of "sexism." Female charges of sexual harassment in the workplace all too often resemble the hysteria in the 90s about supposed satanism and child molestation at pre-school academies by staff. Lives were ruined by overzealous prosecutors only too idiotically willing to swallow the latest semi-academic psychobable and who eagerly seized upon the wildest of TOTALLY unsupported charges.to cynically advance their careers. Worse, evidence shows that many prosecutors were indeed "useful idiot" "true believers" in the "satanist paradigm." And so it is with sexual harassment cases filed by feminists primed to take offense at the most begin and nebulous of utterances/actions., much in the same vein that Dworkin considers all sex to be rape--the overriding social paradigm--equally wrong as the satanist one-- being that the accuser is ALWAYS right.

One difference between Cain and Thomas is that the Cain allegation were made 20 years ago. At the time the alledged incidents occured. With Thomas, there weren't any issues with thim until he was nominated for the big court. Meaning it is more likely the stories about him were fabricated to keep him off the court.

In the 1990s the pendulum was stuck over on career women's rights to be protected from presumed male louts in a powerful executive roles over them.

Remember also that a foreign immigrant man or a black man already had 2 strikes against him when accused of hurting a female's sense of equality by joking about the sexual side of life.

But these Alpha males then felt they could hire and use the attractive women in accounting, computers , sales and marketing, and sometimes in a consigliari role of handling other female staff.

That was a time bomb. If the woman later had troubles doing her work or ran afoul of cabals in the office, so that she was under threat of losing her job, she was usually well enough informed to make a quick complaint for harassment or discrimination to a female run Federal Agency.

She could usually get a settlement and move on with no harm to her resume since all was kept confidential by contract.

Any such complaint would face the business with distraction and require 2 years of attorney's fees to get a hearing that would listen to anything beyond the accusation itself. And winning was not always a given for foreign men and black men.

But a settlement would only be about 10% of the attorney's fees of winning the case.

So Herman was likely accused in similar circumstances.

I want to see how he handles this issue to see what his mind thinks a leader should do when under attack.

In the end this could give Herman a Beauty Mark that make people like him more since he is not a choir boy image.

One difference between Cain and Thomas is that the Cain allegation were made 20 years ago. At the time the alledged incidents occured. With Thomas, there weren't any issues with thim until he was nominated for the big court.

I do think that that's significant, that (apparently) the Cain allegations were made around the time that they allegedly occurred. Recall that not only did Ms. Hill sit on her allegations, but she followed Justice Thomas to another job, specifically requesting to work with him, after the alleged events would have occurred.

That said, though, my default position on these things is to disbelieve them, or to believe that they are wild overreactions - and I hold that standard for people I dislike, too (I was skeptical, though highly amused, at the Al Gore, crazed sex poodle story; and I have no interest whatsoever in Juanita Broderick). Give me specific allegations, not vague feelings, and a person who is willing to look someone in the eye and state them, then I'll be more interested in evaluating them on their merits.

you liberals got to watch these mandingos, dont cha know--got 19 inch schlongs and always looking to put them in white liberal women--bout time for these boys to steal some chains and swim the Tallahatchie--/sarcasm off/

The Sheriff of Philadelphia Mississipie was a piker when it comes to the racism of the modern American liberal.Own it liberals--you make the KKK look decent.

bagoh20 hits on the kernel of the seed that is engendering the downfall of the Republic--it's all a spectator sport to most. In days past this collective public attitude was tolerable only because the reach of the government and the damage it could do was relatively limited. Now that the regulatory reach of the government extends into every nook and cranny the actual real damage to the Republic that elected dolts/ideologues like Obama et al can do is unlimited and incalculable.

The best form of government is the benevolent philosopher-king. Unfortunately, it's absolutely impossible to guarantee the offspring of said monarch would likewise be benevolent. In absence of that, what we've got is about as good as it's going to get with heterogeneous demography, although, truth be told, the South Koreans have one of the most homogeneous populations on Earth and they bitch about who's from what province.

As long as chocolate pudding goes missing from the work fridge, reality TV reigns supreme and things named Bieber walk the Earth, don't expect things to get much more serious.

"[Cain] can't even give an interview without having to walk back a statement he made because he 'didn't understand the question.'"

Of course, this is "he did it too" territory, but one would think a fellator of the "corpseman" SCOAMF would be a little more careful about slamming someone else's gaffes. The problem with using boomerangs is that they come back to hit you. Hard.

"Democrats are scared of Cain the same way they were scared of Palin: scared they could actually be put in charge of something very important--the Presidency."

Why would you choose to be blind to the fact that both have already been tested in charge of important things and proved themselves very capable. Does closing your eyes help you choose better? Hell, you could even pick someone with no history of leadership whatsoever, and then convince yourself you are smart for doing so. That's cool.

my default position on these things is to disbelieve them, or to believe that they are wild overreactions

@ Lyssa. I agree.

In addition to the overly sensitive women hot house flower women, with whom I am also disappointed, I think that there is a culture and/or class culture clash here.

In certain segments of society, some things are 'just not done' (clutching pearls and having the vapors) such as making slightly off color jokes or touching each other in social situations. Other segments see nothing wrong with a good slightly off color joke and have less rigid personal space issues.

Perhaps the 'physical gestures' that these women were so upset about merely consisted of a touch to the shoulders or a hand to the back (as in guiding you first through the door). Remember what a BFD (big fucking deal) the media made when Bush touched Merkel!

Innocent gestures in one culture/segment of society/class can be misconstrued.

When business people are sent to other countries like Japan, they must take a course in etiquette to avoid inadvertent insults.

This whole thing is probably a tempest in a tea pot and ginned up by the MSM on the behalf of the Democrats and to protect Obama and also by the Republican RINO establishment who just refuse to give up their bland white bread cucumber mayonnaise sandwich stance.

Not having followed this particularl story until this morning--and having been trout fishing golfing and dancing in Heber Springs--I have to ask: who is Mark Block? is he an analogue to that egregious little shit, Jay Carney, who masquerades as the white house flack?

some stories are so hackneyed it does not good to go to the beginning--this is one of them--black guy gains traction, black guy is lecher (except for the rev jackson), lets spread innuendo and then retract our innuendo

Got it

Trout fishing and golf are much better than american politics at this stage of my life

garage mahal said...RogerI really don't care. But good question. Maybe the women were only forbidden to disclose the monetary portion of the settlement agreement. So I'll concede the point.

In other words: you can't think past the allegations. You simply are incapable of examining it critically (why would the story say "privacy concerns" for example?) and are now reduced to maybe and what you wish were true.

Even if you took Anita Hill entirely at her word (which would be stupid), everything but the alleged pubic hair on the coke can was completely in the realm of joking banter.

Well, if there's a pube on your coke can, I think it's legal to say, "hey, there's a pube on my coke can!" Juvenile, maybe, but hardly a tort.

Seriously, what are the damages to hearing the word "pube"?

Anita Hill in medical school: "Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!" It's a nude cadaver with a phallus! And pubes!

Let's sue the medical profession out of existence. How dare you expose our dainty flower of femininity to the harsh, brutal reality of male pubic hair references.

Maybe you ought to stay out of the legal profession, Anita, and stick to teaching the 6-year-olds how to play with clay. You'll be safe there. Even if there's a 6-year-old streaker in the class, he won't have any pubes, thank the Lord.

I did not remember that Thomas' response was so powerful. At the time, I thought he was playing the race card. It seems more powerful today after seeing how democrats and the media repeatedly go after conservative blacks and women.

I am very curious about how Biden responded to the attack by Thomas. Anyhone have a link to the response? There was few a few democrats who voted for him. Anyone remember who?

Eldridge Cleaver was a self admitted serial rapist. He wrote a book about it. It was part of his voyage of self discovery and liberation. He was lionized by the left for his honesty and capacity to grow. Later on, when he became a Republican, he was booed at Yale for saying nice things about Reagan. That's what it took to get Yale students to disapprove of Eldridge Cleaver....Jesse Jackson in his capacity as man of the cloth went to the White House to counsel Bill Clinton on his infidelity. Jackson took his girlfriend, instead of his wife, with him on these visits.....You can count on the left to maintain a discreet silence about Kwame Kilpatrick's legal troubles, Maxine Waters' crooked banker husband, and so many other scrapes Democrats get into. They will never be the subject of a Letterman monologue or a SNL skit......I don't think this story reflects well on Herman Cain, but, on the other hand, it doesn't seem like such a ghastly crime. The people who will really come out looking bad are the comedians and media types who try to make too big a deal out of this.

Even super right wing radio show host from Milwaukee, Charlie Sykes, says Cain is insane in the membrane for using Mark Block, especially making him the face of his campaign commercial.Sykes says Cain cannot be President with such poor judgment.

Scott M and Calypso--wonderful anecdotes--and totally off topic, but I used to frequent restaurants and when there was a waiting list, he would put his name down as Chuck Roast--when his name would be called by the wait staff, hilarity would ensue--and invariably someone would send him a gratis drink.trout fisher comes awfully close--remind the lads to use this when the register at the reservation desk.

Well, if there's a pube on your coke can, I think it's legal to say, "hey, there's a pube on my coke can!" Juvenile, maybe, but hardly a tort.

I was remembering that as her thinking that he had put one on the can, to mess with her (though I think that this was only implied, and that there was never any real reason to believe that it wasn't just a random head hair.) I could be misremembering, though.

I would say that if someone took one of his/her pubes, and put it on someone else's drink, that's definitely over the line (and gross). I don't think that Justice Thomas did anything like that, though.

Kansas City said...I did not remember that Thomas' response was so powerful.

I do. He was boiling with outrage. And willing to call his treatment by the committee exactly what it was. Yet nothing has changed, because the underlying motivation for the lefties remains. Their political success depends completely on maintaining a near monolithic voting advantage with an otherwise conservative black population.

Re: Cain's church. I read the entire article. What, exactly, is supposed to be objectionable (to conservatives or liberals) about it? I must have missed the part where the pastor preached about how America deserved 9/11 or something.

Social justice, I guess? Here's what it said about social justice: But like many black Baptist churches, Antioch has developed a strong social justice component to its ministry over the years. It offers ministries for people suffering from drug addition and those infected with HIV/AIDS, and it has been a Sunday stopover for black politicians running for office.

Ya'll realize that this is not the sort of thing that people who are objecting to "social justice" causes are objecting to, right? I can't think of anyone who would disagree that those are ministries that are appropriate for any church.

Cain's church doesn't sound like my style (but I'm Catholic, and most Protestant churches seem goofy to me), but it sounds nice. I liked how people disagreed about politics could still pray together.

Also, wow, there were a lot of ads for psychics on that webpage. What's up with that?

Mito...I read that article you linked to. It was in the local paper a week ago and it makes sense for the AJC's point of view.

But it only points out the Antioch Baptist Church's tradition of leading in the fight against segregation which they call "politically liberal." But it compares that to also being the most theologically conservative church around.

So what. That sounds exactly like me, and I am not now and never have been a liberal except for the 1960s integration fight.

The people who introduced me to Herman 5 years ago are some of the most alert and expert politicians in the area. And they are NOT liberals.

One is a woman that served as an Agency Head in Zell Miller's Administration. Take my word for it, She is unfoolable by people and has a social network all over Georgia.

And a talented woman who is one of my son's longtime friends is now working for the Cain Campaign.

I can tell you with confidence that Herman is a genuine conservative, and one who values women and treats women as equals.

And a talented woman who is one of my son's longtime friends is now working for the Cain Campaign.

TradGuy, I've been interested in trying to get involved in the Cain campaign myself. I've never worked on a presidential campaign before, but would like to. If you might be able to put me in touch with your son's friend, I'd be interested to speak to her. My internet persona email is lyssalovelyredhead@gmail.com. (If you can't or don't get around to it, no hard feelings or anything, of course.)

ChrisinMA - " but one would think a fellator of the "corpseman" SCOAMF would be a little more careful about slamming someone else's gaffes."

I think 95% of Americans would mispronounce the following military terms: Boatswains Mate, M-2, Ensign, Corpsman, and the military pronounciation of "nuclear".

There are gaffes that show the President or Pres candidates are not Godlike and then there are common dumb gaffes we all make "57 States," an exec reading from a text with mind elsewhere discussing natural gas fucking instead of fracking twice before correcting himself".

Then there are real gaffes. The Nixon official discussing the "three things niggers really like", further back that guy Stockman in the old Reagan Administration for letting the truth out on voodoo economics, Perry "having fun with Birther theories", Cain's electrified Border Fence.

As he says, "Send a real black man to the White House".=========================A problem with someone running for President without ever running for any other elective office is they are not well vetted. And they have no experience dealing with "slime stories" the progressive masters of the media launch on selected people running for office. And worse, with black people, the media masters try giving a "pass" to them as long as possible lest they be charged as being racists. So a black running is typically given an uncritical period before charges come out of the past...or the media masters pass the word that this or that black is so good and worthy (Obama, MLK, OPrah) that negative stories are "hurtful". While it is true that some people are well-vetted without running in an election - Generals, Ambassador to China, a SCOTUS judge, a Secretary of State - Herman Cain is not in that group.

Cain would have bettered his odds if he had weathered this all in a smaller more manageble state election - before trying to run for the highest elective office.

I am not sure if the allegations are of a serious nature or not but what I do know is that almost every single campaign has a moment like this and the real key now is how Cain handles it.

If he sinks solely because of this then it will be his own fault. He has to have known this would come up. He should have prepared his campaign better. Especially if he knows that the media and his opponents will use it against him. This is big league politics. Play or perish.

Ya'll realize that this is not the sort of thing that people who are objecting to "social justice" causes are objecting to, right? I can't think of anyone who would disagree that those are ministries that are appropriate for any church.

ChipAhoy--the little red is a fabulous fly stream--yes to your question--fished on cow shoals where the browns are coming up to spawn and then down stream a bit for rainbows--browns were in the 15 inch range; 'bows in the 12 inch range--

What are you talking about?! His campaign has known this was going to come out for a couple of weeks now and they didn't know how to respond...at first the campaign denied it "to the best of their knowledge", then he denied it, then he said he wouldn't know if the association paid the money or not, then said they wouldn't respond to anonymous claims (even though Politico told them who the source was)...

This should have been cut off at the knees when Politico originally contacted them asking for comment; the fact that it came out the way it did was a failure to respond...

Just wait until he tries to respond to his campaign's illegal campaign financing...I'm certain it will be "expert" as well...

I'm not a big Glenn Beck follower, but I highly doubt he's argued that churches shouldn't minister to addicts and AIDS patients (particularly given his history of addiction). But if Mr. Beck doesn't want to vote for Mr. Cain because it take unquestionably good acts and calls them "social justice", that's his right, silly as it might be. What's your point?

Lyssa, my point is that many of Beck's followers are also commenters here. The fact that Glenn Beck told his followers to "run" away from any church that speaks of "social justice" issues, yet Cain belongs to such a church , not a word about it from the Beckians here. Just pointing out the hypocrisy.

The fact that Glenn Beck told his followers to "run" away from any church that speaks of "social justice" issues, yet Cain belongs to such a church , not a word about it from the Beckians here. Just pointing out the hypocrisy.

Unless both a) Glenn Beck is arguing that churches should not perform "social justice" when it is defined as actions such as ministering to addicts and the sick, and b) commenters here are saying either Glenn Beck is right about that or that Glenn Beck is right about everything on earth ever, there's absolutely no hypocricy there. As Scott M and Michael indicated, I'm not even aware of any commenters here who are Beck devotees, but even if someone thinks he's fab, they are allowed to disagree with him on some things.

Lyssa--then you and I are both very intelligent--or at the lowest common denominator lousy proof readers--at any rate, I hope you realize I was being a bit of a smart ass--the jibe was aimed not at you but that subset of trolls who, when unable to provide facts or logic, sieze on typos.

Roger, you know most of you followed Beck at one time or another. Why deny, ashamed? Many rats did jump the Beck ship as it was sinking though.

You lost the argument, M-A. You don't "know" anything of the sort. Beck, like just about every other person in punditry, makes good points and bad points. Neither of which makes any of the regulars here the brain dead "followers" you thought you were talking about.

MA--really poor--I have heard of Glen Beck thru blogs; I dont own a TV and havent watched TV for the last 3 years--My understanding is that Glen Beck and Keith Olberman are two peas in a pod at opposite ends of the pod.

so no, sweet pea--you continue to make unsuported assertions and in so doing defame people. You are simply stupid.

It seems to me you could simply retract your ridculous assertion and say you were wrong. Thats fine. That would tell me you at least have some inner compass. But you continue to double down on stupid.--you are both a coward and a dishonest one at that.

Matt and MA--from my perspective, I dont really much care what people watch on TV or hear on radio-- I am willing to consider their opinions and assume those opinions are theirs.

Why do you, Matt and MA, assume that commenters are incapable of providing their personal views? I assume when someone posts they are stating their view of things. Apparently, you do not believe that--so whose views, Matt and MA, are you parroting?

Roger, you know most of you followed Beck at one time or another. Why deny, ashamed? Many rats did jump the Beck ship as it was sinking though.

We could play that game all day and you know exactly what would happen if you started on specifics, don't you? An endless round and round of "You denounce x for y", "No, you denounce z first". Various pundits and various claims would be paraded about with a net zero result.

If you don't understand that, you don't know much about commentaria. What I find so intriguing, though, is the propensity for the regulars on the left hereabouts to fight admitting the were wrong as you see MA doing above. GM, for all his faults, is the only one that does so on occasion. I have, on the other hand, seen many of the more conservative commentors allow good points when made. I see that very, very rarely from the more "progressive" wing of Althouse.

Roger I am wrong, perhaps you and Lyssa don't follow Beck, but the rest of you Probably did and still do.I'll be waiting for more Beck deniers to come forward. Just like when Jesus was denied by Peter, how sad.

tell me MA (and Matt if you would like to join in). Precisely how do you know I have any idea what Glen Back says? Do you suggest I was lying when I said I dont own a TV? Do you suggest I was lying when I said I have no idea who Glen Beck is other than thru secondary and tertiary commentary on the internet?

I think 95% of Americans would mispronounce the following military terms: Boatswains Mate, M-2, Ensign, Corpsman, and the military pronounciation of "nuclear".

Probably so, HOWEVER 95% or even 99.99% of us are not the President of the United States.

As such, if he is unsure of how to pronounce something (or how many States there are in the United States) he has some highly paid advisors who are "supposed" to be advising. Doesn't he have any one to listen to his speeches before he gives them?

I've given many speeches and when I was unsure of how to pronounce a person's name, the city that I was in or any other term....I made sure that I knew before hand how to say it.

Roger I am wrong, perhaps you and Lyssa don't follow Beck, but the rest of you Probably did and still do.

Why did you capitalize "probably"? Why do you have such a low opinion of people you don't know and can't have that kind of info about?What is the capital of Montana?Why do you bother posting here if we're all knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers?

However, it is a rather common procedure to lump all 'lefties' with Michael Moore and Olbermann and all 'righties' with Rush or Beck and then point out that if each particular person does not denounce Moore or Beck [et al.] then they are guilty of the same belief system.

It's all b.s. - of course. But have become standard accusations on blogs.

So I was having fun with that concept. I'm a lefty but Olbermann and Moore bug me. I would gather you are a righty but you don't know or care for Beck. Fair enough.

Matt--point taken --and yes, I did lump you in with MA's comments--tell you what Matt--lets continue to dialogue thru subsequent posts--If I misstated your positions, my apologies. And I do look forward to to continued conversation.

However, the point was - if I can take a somewhat more serious approach - Beck is mostly an independent conservative who has some views I am sure you approve of - from immigration to the role of the Federal government in our lives.

But, yes, just because you may approve of some of his views they are not solely his views. Therefore I won't lump you in with Beck's views since many more sensible people share them.

Beck is mostly an independent conservative who has some views I am sure you approve of - from immigration to the role of the Federal government in our lives.

But, yes, just because you may approve of some of his views they are not solely his views. Therefore I won't lump you in with Beck's views since many more sensible people share them.

Thank you. That is a sensible approach. I have no idea what Beck's views are and maybe I agree with some of them.....or not

However, the tendency of people (like Mitro) to immediately lump everyone that holds a differing viewpoint into a group as being unable to have independent thoughts, such as.... "Beck" followers, Fox News lackies, Rush Limbaugh ditto heats etc. is more than annoying. It shows an inability to reason, debate or have civil discourse.

Scott M said;Why did you capitalize "probably"? Why do you have such a low opinion of people you don't know and can't have that kind of info about?What is the capital of Montana?Why do you bother posting here if we're all knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers?

10/31/11 3:55 PM

That is a really going point Scott, some particularly nasty hateful folks here don't know me , but they continue to attack the veracity of my comments about my family, my life and whatever details about myself I may post when trying to make a point about a certain subject we may have been discussing.

When I post that some of you or may be or many of you may be Beckians , you feel insulted and rightly so. How do you think it feels to have folks who say in one comment that they will pray for someone and the next that I killed my own husband , who died of cancer. NOT one of you interjected to say that these commenters had gone too far, that they were just way out of line.

No matter what side of the political spectrum one stands on human decency should trump it. Just another lesson in hypocrisy.

And we all know that NEVER fucking happens from the right wing on this blog.

And we all know that NEVER fucking happens from the left wing on this blog.

Call it out where it happens in specifics and challenge it specifically and and I daresay you'll get the same hemming and hawing we got from M-A on this thread.

It's one thing to say "the Left thinks" or "the Right thinks" such and such. Those are extremely broad statements. However, stating that one knows who follows who merely by their apparently side of the spectrum is specific enough to warrant challenge.

I'm still trying to figure out why I'm a hypocrite for not speaking up when someone talks about M-A's family. I don't suppose that will be made clear, though.

Mitzie is the perpetual victim. She comes here to cry her crocidile tears and talk about how everyone is so mean to her when she has been nothing but an absolute bitch to everyone here from the minute she dragged her lying ass into this blog. Check out some of her comments about Dust Bunny Queen one of most respected commenters. Ask yourself why you should believe a word she says.

Mitzie is the perpetual victim. She comes here to cry her crocodile tears and talk about how everyone is so mean to her when she has been nothing but an absolute bitch to everyone here from the minute she dragged her lying ass into this blog. Check out some of her comments about Dust Bunny Queen one of our most respected commenters. Ask yourself why you should believe a word she says.

Dred Scott. Civil War, Opoosition to the first Civil Right Law. The KKK, Jim Crow,Law of Mann,segregation in the public service. Union cards when unions were created to oppose the hiring of Afroamericans. Filibustering.Last member of the KKK elected as Supreme court Justice

Civil War.Abolition of slavery.Civil Rights Law. First Afroamerican elected as Senator.Brown vs Board of Education.Dismantling of the KKK . First Afroamerican as Chief of The Army. First Afroamerican women as Secretary of State

RogerJ you should be aware that Mitzie is a prime example of "Stolen Valor" one step removed. She claims absoulte moral authority based on her daughter who she claims is a very liberal member of our armed forces.

Garage I saw Dust Bunny's Audie Murphey blog. I find it very strange that she is so obsessed with me and my family. It is coming VERY VERY close to being stalked. I am going to show my youngest daughter who is an attorney , her blog and see what can be done, if anything, it's just plain creepy.

Wow. Truly insane.

I have two blogs and have better things to do than to create a third blog about a piece of human waste such as you.

Ok it appears that my stalker may be Trooper York, cut and paste from Audie Murphy Mom blog;

Chip S. said...Hey, Trooper.

Cards > Rangers > Tigers > Yanks

Tough year for the AL East.

Has anyone heard from Herman Carol lately? I miss his pith.

No, that's not a Titus reference.October 30, 2011 9:21 PM Mitochondri-Allie said...So you are Trooper? well that wouldn't be surprising at all. Will be showing my daughter , the attorney, this blog, we will find out pretty quickly who is stalking me, you do realize that cyberstalking is illegal. Don't you?October 31, 2011 3:17 PM

So, if it isn Dust Bunny I apologize.Bit my daughter has seen the blog and the comments here on Althouse, she agrees about the possibility of cyberstalking. We are looking into it further.

So, if it isn Dust Bunny I apologize.Bit my daughter has seen the blog and the comments here on Althouse, she agrees about the possibility of cyberstalking. We are looking into it further.

Fuck off.

Cyberstalking is when we come to you and track you personally down all over the internet to try to cause you harm. We don't know who the hell you are because you are anonymous here. But I'm pretty sure I know what you are. Insane.

Just getting your grannie panties in a wad because you can't keep up to speed on a public blog that YOU chose to haunt is not cyber stalking you dimwitted menopausal bint.

So, if it isn Dust Bunny I apologize.Bit my daughter has seen the blog and the comments here on Althouse, she agrees about the possibility of cyberstalking. We are looking into it further.

(reposting with italics so it is quite clear who is saying what)

Fuck off.

Cyberstalking is when we come to you and track you personally down all over the internet to try to cause you harm. We don't know who the hell you are because you are anonymous here. But I'm pretty sure I know what you are. Insane.

Just getting your grannie panties in a wad because you can't keep up to speed on a public blog that YOU chose to haunt is not cyber stalking you dimwitted menopausal bint.

Dumb Bunny go to hell, I take back my apology ,you are every bit as capable as Trooper York, or even Sixty Grit to have made that blog. You want to a be seen as a decent person, you are not. Love was SO right when she said you were a hate filled unhappy woman.

Out of three conservatives I work with, two attended Beck's performance art show on the Washington Mall and, one, a bit more circumspect than the other two if just as right-wingy, responded to my inquiry regarding his interest in Beck by saying that his FOX show ratings were in the dump.

As my moderate, much wittier and Colbert-watching colleague said at the time, (paraphrasing) "Who the hell responds to a question regarding his interest in a show by bashing the star's ratings?"

Answer: Someone embarrassed to admit that he wishes he could express his like of him.

I suspect that you know Beck is a clown, but admire the way he makes right-wing ideology sound naively innocent. And yes, you would follow him if sane company didn't realize how close he is to playing with his poop.

wv: embled. Great portmanteau of "embed" and "bled". I'm sure there's an obvious neologism in there somewhere, but I'm too taken with how awesome it sounds and looks to ponder deeply into that right now. Plus, I'm tired.

The obsessive compulsion with confusing commenters y'all don't like is hilarious in its stupidity. Hear it loud Right Wingers: More than one person on this blog's comments section and in America can think your opinions stupid and state as much on unprompted notice.

Tell us again about how Muslims are really just Bolshevist Communists or something.

This thread has degenerated into some kind of incestuous hypertalk between several posters...ick.

The tape Professor A posted is as one poster noted, really a much stronger revisit than I remember from the original. Joe Biden looking down and away, said it all. Though I also, wanted to find the entire tape and review it all.

This "bomb" is too calulated and obvious. Even us rubes out here in fly over land with hay in our hair can see what this is about. The reason Cain is leading is because we are done with this..everything about the pro's in politics is over. We see you and we do not want what you are selling. All of you, right and left, are integral to the demise of our republic.

Anyone that has ever worked in HR and Compliance will tell you that it is not uncommon for the CEO to be out of the loop on these issues, specifically so there is no appearance of conflict of interest in the CEO holding "hire/fire" power over the compliance officer charged with investigating. Often times the money paid is termination related, not hush money, although it is typical for the "contract" for ending the complaint involves leaving and being quiet by one party and termination payment by the other. It's usually accumulated sick leave or calculated to income.

A decent investigative reporter would have contacted their own compliance officer and asked these questions..I've not heard one report that addresses this. Not one.

Well, I guess it takes a proud sock puppet to find so many others to be meritorious of the accusation.

The idea that this Audie Murphy malarkey is an unscripted identity suddenly asserting itself is obviously ridiculous bullshit.

Whoever's behind it (and I hope it's not Trooper - he's talented and creative enough to do something like that on his own ample blogspace) obviously doesn't need to further the paranoia that these righties have of sock puppetry, by abetting it themselves.

Just come out and say to Mito what you think your problem is with her. At some point, it's no longer a joke and just betrays a lot of cowardice.